Legal Research
Cases
Turner v The Queen

Turner v The Queen

Case [2018] NZCA 175 29 May 2018

Type to search within this case.

IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF NEW ZEALAND

I TE KŌTI PĪRA O AOTEAROA

CA604/2016
[2018] NZCA 175

BETWEEN	LEON DELSHANNON TURNER Appellant
AND	THE QUEEN Respondent

CA630/2016
BETWEEN	PETER DAMIAN GILBERT Appellant
AND	THE QUEEN Respondent

CA656/2016
BETWEEN	AUGUST KEEFE Appellant
AND	THE QUEEN Respondent

CA26/2017
BETWEEN	JASON PHILLIP REWETI Appellant
AND	THE QUEEN Respondent

CA77/2017
BETWEEN	MATTHEW JOSEPH MULVEY Appellant
AND	THE QUEEN Respondent

Hearing:	30 April 2018
Court:	Kós P, Brewer and Gendall JJ
Counsel:	L L Heah for Appellant Turner C D Eason for Appellant Gilbert Appellant Keefe in Person C M Ruane for Appellant Reweti N P Chisnall for Appellant Mulvey J C Pike QC for Respondent
Judgment:	29 May 2018 at 3 pm

JUDGMENT OF THE COURT

AThe applications for extensions of time to appeal are granted.
BThe appeals are dismissed.

____________________________________________________________________

REASONS OF THE COURT

(Given by Kós P)

The complainant Dawson Reihana, a member of the Mongrel Mob Notorious chapter in Christchurch, was attacked and badly injured on the afternoon of Saturday 8 August 2015. Numerous assailants were involved. Mr Reihana was hit with hammers, fists and knees. The injuries to Mr Reihana were described by Mander J in sentencing in the High Court:[1]
Mr Reihana received extensive facial bruising and swelling as a result of the violence. Both of his eyes were swollen shut. The photographs of the damage to his face were graphic. He received multiple lacerations to his forehead and to the back of his head, and a gouge wound to his scalp, together with further cuts to his cheek area and forehead. His nose was fractured. He also suffered grazing and bruising to the back of both of his wrists, and bruising to his knees, body and limbs.
[1]R v Mulvey [2016] NZHC 2568 at [15].
These assaults began at an address on Ajax Street, Burwood, Christchurch, and continued (after he was transported in a motor vehicle) at another address on Bowenvale Avenue, Cashmere. The detention at Bowenvale Avenue fell into two parts; at some point in the evening of 8 August 2015 Mr Reihana was put in a motor vehicle and driven around Christchurch, allegedly (and unsuccessfully) to extort money from associates for his release.[2] Early in the morning of Sunday 9 August 2015 the man guarding Mr Reihana at Bowenvale Avenue fell asleep. Mr Reihana managed to extract the guard’s cellphone and make two 111 calls. Within an hour or thereabouts he was rescued by the police.
[2]Mr Reihana’s evidence was that he deliberately directed his assailants to unrelated locations.
None of the above is in doubt. What is in issue is who the assailants were. And the extent to which they were involved. Mr Reihana was familiar with all the appellants apart from Mr Reweti. Some he had known for many years. Mr Reihana was establishing a Mongrel Mob chapter, Mongrel Mob Notorious, in Christchurch. The appellants are members or associates of another, rival Mongrel Mob chapter, Mongrel Mob Aotearoa.
All five appellants were…

Grounds of appeal

[14] The appellant contends that the primary judge erred in finding that the respondent had discharged the onus of establishing the matters required under the relevant provision.

[15] It was submitted that his Honour failed to give adequate weight to the evidence of the second witness, and that the findings of fact were not reasonably open on the material before the Court.

[16] The respondent, for its part, submits that no error is disclosed, and that the conclusions reached were well within the range of outcomes available to the primary judge.

Consideration

[17] It is convenient to deal first with the question of construction, as the resolution of that issue informs the remaining grounds advanced by the appellant.

[18] For the reasons that follow, we are of the view that the appeal should be allowed in part and the matter remitted for further determination.

Continue reading Turner v The Queen

Details

AGLC: Turner v The Queen [2018] NZCA 175
Case: [2018] NZCA 175
Decision Date: 29 May 2018

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The applicants appealed against their convictions and sentences for various charges related to the kidnapping and assault of Dawson Reihana, a member of a rival gang, by members of the Mongrel Mob Aotearoa gang in Christchurch. The applicants argued that there was trial counsel error and that their sentences were manifestly excessive. The Court of Appeal of New Zealand granted the applications for extensions of time to appeal and dismissed the appeals. The Court found that there was no trial counsel error as the counsel followed the instructions given by the applicants and the tactical decisions made were reasonable. The Court also found that the sentences imposed by the High Court were within the appropriate range and there was no basis to interfere with them.

Orders